Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Theyre already talking about a Destiny Sequel.

BreshaBresha Member Posts: 65

Apparently with a "Lord of the Rings sized narrative".Which the original should have had with the amount of money they spent on it..

 

And what ever happened to the first one thats supposed to last 10-20 years? now were casting it aside and already talking of a sequel? On to the next money grab I guess.

 

 

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/571737/20141105/destiny-sequel-bungie-lord-rings-narrative-activision.htm#.VFqAwckaI2x

Comments

  • GravargGravarg Member UncommonPosts: 3,424
    It'll be like CoD. come out with one every year, and not really change or add anything.  Have you seen the new CoD, it's so horrible.  They added in a grappling hook and jump jets...that's pretty much it lol.  The combat is horrible and everyone ends up with like 40-40 kills-deaths because unless you get shot in the toe, you die lol.
  • BreshaBresha Member Posts: 65
    Originally posted by Gravarg
    It'll be like CoD. come out with one every year, and not really change or add anything.  Have you seen the new CoD, it's so horrible.  They added in a grappling hook and jump jets...that's pretty much it lol.  The combat is horrible and everyone ends up with like 40-40 kills-deaths because unless you get shot in the toe, you die lol.

    I honestly stopped playing CoD since MW2.

     

    Im glad I dodged those many,many bullets.

  • ThaneThane Member EpicPosts: 3,505

    i don't think a dev team will suddenly have a change of 100% on it's course and come up with "awesome story telling" out of nowhere.

    as far as i remember they already said the 1st one would be "epic" and "awesome" and whatnot, but quite frankly, it wasn't - was it?

     

    if they could have toled a story propperly, they would have done so.

    "I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"

  • BreshaBresha Member Posts: 65
    Originally posted by Thane

    i don't think a dev team will suddenly have a change of 100% on it's course and come up with "awesome story telling" out of nowhere.

    as far as i remember they already said the 1st one would be "epic" and "awesome" and whatnot, but quite frankly, it wasn't - was it?

     

    if they could have toled a story propperly, they would have done so.

    Exactly.

     

    Its nothing more than Activision firing up the hype for their next money grab.

  • jdnewelljdnewell Member UncommonPosts: 2,237

    I wont be pre ordering the next one. Lesson learned and $90 lighter from the current game.

    If they pull a CoD on this series I will skip them all just like I do CoD.

  • XiaokiXiaoki Member RarePosts: 3,358
    You have no idea what you are talking about.


    From the very beginning the outline for Destiny was a 10 year plan for Destiny, 2 sequels and expansions for each installment.

    A little research and 2 minutes on Google would have shown you this.



    Did you think they were going to update Destiny for 10 years?
  • OhhPaigeyOhhPaigey Member RarePosts: 1,517

    Why wouldn't they? They already cut out half of this game to sell to you as DLC.

    People are going to buy that, and then their new game lmao.

    When all is said and done, more is always said than done.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919

    No news at all this to people who use google: the deal with Activision calls for Destiny 3 and a Destiny 4 as well.

    WoW 5 has just been released as well by the way - goes under the handle WoD. What you ask? Destiny 2 is to Destiny as Burning Crusade was to WoW. An "expansion" rather than a "new game". And for Destiny 3 think WotLK. Got it now. 

    As for cutting the game in half a question: LotR 2 and 3 were filmed at the same time. Were they released at different times because

    1. the sequel was cut in two or 
    2. because Return of the King wasn't finished?

    Bonus question: was the Destiny DLC not released because 1) it was cut or 2) because it wasn't finished?

    A discussion about whether Destiny was or was not worth the box price - that's a genuine discussion. Saying the DLC was cut is just regurgitating ill informed rants (imo).

    As said above there is a plan for the game. It includes DLC and expansions. These will have to be purchased - individually or, I suspect, in bundles downstream; that is the business model.

     

     

  • RaquisRaquis Member RarePosts: 1,018

    I did not buy the first one and if the second one is so bad then they can keep it.

    waiting for STAR WARS BATTLEFRONT.

  • HaritsukeHaritsuke Member UncommonPosts: 18

    I happen to like Bungie's business model more than Blizzards for WoW.  I could've played WoW for $15 a month for the last year and received almost no new content.  Or I could pay $35 for two mini-expansions for Destiny.  

    Both games require a lot of maintenance, patches, and bug fixes.  But instead of $15 a month, with Destiny I get to decide if I want to pay for the new content updates.  Seems like a win for the consumer over the subscription model.

    Destiny 2 will also be an easy purchase for me as I love the world they have made and look forward to seeing more of it.

  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 7,254

    Prayer Hands animated emoticon

     

    Please make it third person view

    Martens: "With all due respect, madam, where are you going with this?"
    Avasarala: "Wherever I goddamn like."
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Given how bad Destiny was, having the game created by Bungie might not be the best idea going, lately they've been failing pretty hard at making games, and for a FPS there are quite a few developers out there who do it much better, wouldn't be the first time that a 'franchise' improved their game by changing the developers either, just saying image
  • aftabbooaftabboo Member Posts: 67

    No offence but destiny isn't even that good and they said that it would have a 10 year life.

     

    Them speaking about a sequel for a game which supposedly has a 10 year life and in my opinion isn't even that good is very premature.

     

    ps. I was disappointed with destiny's graphics. Sure its better than some things in the past but I have seen much better graphical fidelity from other next gen mmos.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by Raquis

    I did not buy the first one and if the second one is so bad then they can keep it.

    waiting for STAR WARS BATTLEFRONT.

    You don't like the look of the game - fine.

    Notwithstanding the fact that you haven't bought the game why did you post? You do realise that "Destiny 2" isn't released; has no trailer; not even any leaks?

    There will be - absolutely will be - people who will say that  SW Battlefront "is bad". "SW Battlefront 2" is planned as well. So what would you feel if someone posts: I haven't bought SW Battlefront and (even though it isn't released yet and no one has seen anything about it) if SW Battlefront 2 is as bad as people are saying I won't be buying that either? That it sounds pretty stupid maybe?

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by Haritsuke

    I happen to like Bungie's business model more than Blizzards for WoW.  I could've played WoW for $15 a month for the last year and received almost no new content.  Or I could pay $35 for two mini-expansions for Destiny.  

    Both games require a lot of maintenance, patches, and bug fixes.  But instead of $15 a month, with Destiny I get to decide if I want to pay for the new content updates.  Seems like a win for the consumer over the subscription model.

    Destiny 2 will also be an easy purchase for me as I love the world they have made and look forward to seeing more of it.

    Absolutely agree.

    Company releases game; we choose to buy the game or not. Very much a win for the consumer. Seems to be the way that EA are moving with a lot of there games as well. If "regular" subscribers think about the price per patch they could start to look very expensive.

    Of course not everyone plays the same game all the time. So you get the "I played at launch and then left, might come back after patch x.x to play for a month". And when they do they will get all the patches since they last played for however long they stay subscribed. Which doesn't necessarily benefit the game company. Not surprised EA is moving a lot of its games to this type of model. 

    And then the debate about a game will be what it should be: is it a good game; is it worth the price. And reviewers won't be saying stupid things like: WS has regular monthly content planned so this is going to be a really great game. Or MoP is great value for money but - heh - was it worth the $300+ price tag? 

  • aftabbooaftabboo Member Posts: 67
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by Raquis

    I did not buy the first one and if the second one is so bad then they can keep it.

    waiting for STAR WARS BATTLEFRONT.

    You don't like the look of the game - fine.

    Notwithstanding the fact that you haven't bought the game why did you post? You do realise that "Destiny 2" isn't released; has no trailer; not even any leaks?

    There will be - absolutely will be - people who will say that  SW Battlefront "is bad". "SW Battlefront 2" is planned as well. So what would you feel if someone posts: I haven't bought SW Battlefront and (even though it isn't released yet and no one has seen anything about it) if SW Battlefront 2 is as bad as people are saying I won't be buying that either? That it sounds pretty stupid maybe?

    You can comment without buying the game. Who are you??? the internet god who decides what can and cannot be said.

     

    Like I said on another post, you can form valid and justified opinions without having tried something. Its called learning, its similar to something we did at school and how we pick products based on their features without going out and buying them all.

  • HeraseHerase Member RarePosts: 993
    Originally posted by gervaise1

    As for cutting the game in half a question: LotR 2 and 3 were filmed at the same time. Were they released at different times because

    1. the sequel was cut in two or 
    2. because Return of the King wasn't finished?

    Bonus question: was the Destiny DLC not released because 1) it was cut or 2) because it wasn't finished?

    A discussion about whether Destiny was or was not worth the box price - that's a genuine discussion. Saying the DLC was cut is just regurgitating ill informed rants (imo).

    As said above there is a plan for the game. It includes DLC and expansions. These will have to be purchased - individually or, I suspect, in bundles downstream; that is the business model.

     

    Im not sure what point your trying to make here and if we're all so ill informed then inform us? Hate when people say, "you don;t know what you're talking about", but then don't bother filling you in.

    Regardless you don't have to be informed, just play the game and you can see straight off the bat how lacking the story is, and there is no way you can use LotR, for it to even compare the start would have to be Gandalf giving the ring to a random hobbit without use ever knowing why or why this hobbit. The point i'm making is the story lacks, it's not a bad story but it's clear that they have purposely missed info out.   

     

    There's nothing wrong with having a plan, ever business needs a plan, but when that plan screws over it's customers by purposely holding back on content, then there's a problem.

     

    But to answer the point you made, the box price i can in some way understand, but are the so called "expansions" worth it? no because they're content updates like SoO or ToT.

     

    Don't get me wrong i don't hate the game it's more companies taking advantage. My blame is with Activision tbh, but ill wait to see how the new Halo comes out.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by Herase
    Originally posted by gervaise1

    As for cutting the game in half a question: LotR 2 and 3 were filmed at the same time. Were they released at different times because

    1. the sequel was cut in two or 
    2. because Return of the King wasn't finished?

    Bonus question: was the Destiny DLC not released because 1) it was cut or 2) because it wasn't finished?

    A discussion about whether Destiny was or was not worth the box price - that's a genuine discussion. Saying the DLC was cut is just regurgitating ill informed rants (imo).

    As said above there is a plan for the game. It includes DLC and expansions. These will have to be purchased - individually or, I suspect, in bundles downstream; that is the business model.

     

    Im not sure what point your trying to make here and if we're all so ill informed then inform us? Hate when people say, "you don;t know what you're talking about", but then don't bother filling you in.

    Regardless you don't have to be informed, just play the game and you can see straight off the bat how lacking the story is, and there is no way you can use LotR, for it to even compare the start would have to be Gandalf giving the ring to a random hobbit without use ever knowing why or why this hobbit. The point i'm making is the story lacks, it's not a bad story but it's clear that they have purposely missed info out.   

     There's nothing wrong with having a plan, ever business needs a plan, but when that plan screws over it's customers by purposely holding back on content, then there's a problem.

     But to answer the point you made, the box price i can in some way understand, but are the so called "expansions" worth it? no because they're content updates like SoO or ToT.

     Don't get me wrong i don't hate the game it's more companies taking advantage. My blame is with Activision tbh, but ill wait to see how the new Halo comes out.

     

    The comparison with LotR is straightforward. Live action shooting for films 2 and 3 was done (mostly) at the same time. Didn't mean that film 3 was finished though when film 2 was released. Lots of things work like this. Some people however saw "future content" on the discs and assumed that it had been cut from the base game. Bungie have said that wasn't the case. DLC has always been planned. And some people have posted that they are happy that Bungie included stuff they had finished because it will reduce their download.

    Now having a discussion about whether or not there was enough content to justify the price - that's always a reasonable discussion to have.

    Same discussion with the DLC - will they be worth it. Not sure you can use ToT and SoO as a reason why they won't be though. Comparing B2P with subs is hard. How much new content did people who subscribed for the 14 months prior to WoD get - at a cost of $210? Was that good value? If people enjoyed themselves sure. Same with Destiny though.

Sign In or Register to comment.